Talk:Act of War: High Treason

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

New Thread[edit]

AOW : HT is releasing soon. Once it is released we have to create this article.

SkyWalker 16:45, 14 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Help[edit]

I have added this article. If u have any further information about this game please be free to add. If there are spell mistakes please correct. Let me know.

Thanks SkyWalker 07:08, 18 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

- Roger that. Wilco, I'll add to this one as soon as I can. EDIT: Ok, added info on the scud mode, feel free to go over it. Will try to do the factions soon. (also, need more info on naval.) gg

- Looks good. Thanks for helping . Please be free to add a lot more.

SkyWalker 15:53, 1 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have added some more things. Due to lack of information iam unable to add factions,Skirmish(Engagement),MultiPlayer. If anyone has got any information please add and do the changes necessary SkyWalker 17:05, 6 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I said I'd help, but been busy with school, and easter is just around the corner. I should be able to add alot more then. GMT+1 10:20, 7 April 2006

Ok, I did all units/changes/upgrades for the US side. Feel free to go over and possibly organize it. (I'm new to how this wikipedia editing stuff works.) Also, since the faction descriptions on the DA page provide a bit more backround info, perhaps a link to that page should be put up? (By the way, I used the manual and took info from there. I didn't really see it fitting to write about the factions in the same style I did for the DA page. This is an expansion after all.)

To whoever changed the "new units" thing for the US, the MLRS, and the Thunderbolt is not new units. But they have been altered.

Understood. I will make the changes tomorrow. I will add upgrade seprately SkyWalker 15:53, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Question[edit]

Is AoW: HT an expansion pack or a stand-alone game? Direct2Drive is selling it for $40 as a standalone, which is different from everything I've heard elsewhere. --BMS 03:43, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The D2D version of the game is completely stand-alone.

I think its stand alone. The game has its own directories and files. They are not merged with the main game like normal expansion packs do.

The D2D version is Stand - alone. The Boxed version (Act of War:High Treason) you need Act of War: Direct Action to play. Hope noone is confused now. --SkyWalker 17:55, 18 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This game is avaliable in US.[edit]

You can buy this game(Act of War: High Treason)from here :=

1.Circuit City

2.J&R Music and Computer World

3.Amazon Site

4.Best Buy

Enjoy,

Happy Gaming

--SkyWalker 15:21, 18 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks alot, SkyWalker. I've been looking for this game since it supposedly came out. This is the first I've found of it offline in the States.

-Fluke

Screenshots[edit]

We need more screenshots.--Taida 00:02, 18 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Which screenshots to add? --SkyWalker 16:10, 20 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know, I've never played this game.--Taida 17:59, 2 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Command and Conquer: Generals[edit]

What I don't understand is how no one critisizes the fact that both this game and the first one look like a direct copy of Command and Conquer: Generals. The first article mentions that it's based off of this but it looks so completely similar, just a little better (and was created 2 years after Generals). Since it looks a ton better than Generals (in terms of graphics and concept), to me, it should just be called Command and Conquer: Generals 2.

This game has nothing got to with generals. --SkyWalker 12:22, 29 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I know it has nothing to do with Generals... different company, different... a lot of things. I didn't literally mean they should make the name C&C: Generals 2.
It does look very similar to Generals--Taida 17:55, 2 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

GamePlay section[edit]

Can someone with more knowledge of this game than I please rewrite this section, as it currently reads like a press release. Contrary to what has been suggested, I am not objecting because I suspect a copyright violation- I believe that at present the section does not conform to WP:NPOV and generally does not seem to have the formal tone one expects from an encyclopaedia MarkSutton 15:02, 21 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I already said that i have taken permission from atari before i have added that to wikipedia. Please remove the ads tags or i have to remove it because hardly anyone knows about the game. This article was added on march 2006 and now what you do is put the tags. --SkyWalker 09:01, 22 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I am not doubting that Atari gave you permission {please don't edit my comments to try and change their emphasis). I am arguing that the section is not a neutral point of view, which is what is expected on Wikipedia. Language such as "this feature alone promises to make this expansion pack one of the most interesting new RTS offerings in 2006" has a certain hint of bias to it. MarkSutton 10:44, 22 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The article looks fine to me. What do you want to suggest?. Edit it if you like. --SkyWalker 11:38, 22 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Act of war[edit]

This game is even better than some other games could have ever been but still Act of war "Died" faster than other games.How could this game become like it has a lower priority than for example C&C generals if you think that C&C generals game is older and still has a higher priority than a game like act of war that came out in 2006 than I think this should be changed. 82.114.81.148 15:06, 3 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

AOW died due to lack of marketing done by Atari. Hardly anyone in this world known about Act of War: Direct Action and Act of War: High Treason. All though it is one of the best games ever created by Eugen Systems. I hope people will come to know about the potential of this game. --SkyWalker 15:54, 3 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
However, the better games are always left behind. I would like to add that this game belongs to a group of games left to be ignored be the world. Maybe we should add these games into a list and then

people might take moves to write more articles about these games.Otherwise it is hard to make people think different and there will not be any. 82.114.81.150 21:06, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Do whatever it needs to be done. This games need praise. --SkyWalker 07:50, 9 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

windows XP 64 bits[edit]

It doesn´t go under windows xp 64 bits. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.153.30.146 (talk) 07:07, 26 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Act of War: High Treason. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:41, 26 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Act of War: High Treason. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:48, 11 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Act_of_War:_High_Treason&oldid=1204497751"